One never truly knows where the
next line of literary criticism will spawn from, but one that is certainly
moving to the forefront is youth studies. Over the past few centuries a
peculiar change has come over our ideas of youth, encompassing many more
people. While before a child growing up would only go through the stages of
childhood before reaching adult status, now there is an ever-expanding time of
young adulthood. With this new section of human growth, also come more ideas of
how to think about those in this time. These predetermined socially constructed
ideas of youth, structure our thinking of the groups and individuals classified
as young adults or teenagers before we even encounter them. Beyond our personal
interactions with these ideas in our day-to-day lives, we engage with them in
text with young characters; and what’s more the author can be seen interacting
with these ideas as well. Like most ways authors think about when creating a text
in the western tradition, William Shakespeare’s works are a construing factor
to these concepts of youth.
While
our ideas of youth are something society is concerned with, youths themselves
are influenced by them. Many of these notions of how young adults act and think
are essentially a self fulfilling prophecy in that they become the very way
young adults think and act. The place in Shakespeare’s work that many of these
ideas stem from is found in, arguably his greatest work, Hamlet. The character, Hamlet, begins the play at the age of
sixteen, and is teeming with these ideas we have of youth; by the end of the
play he ascends these ideas to become an adult. This process is done in part
through self-discovery, which one must achieve to do as Hamlet does in order to
leave this age. The course of
Hamlet’s self-discovery is seen through his many soliloquies in which he
separates his thoughts from his actions. Hamlet more than most his age sees the
world much as it is, a place of pain and anger; and throughout the play laments
his part in it. He recognizes that his actions are no different than those
committed by his foes, but fails to rectify this. It is this disparity between
his thoughts and actions that allow the audience to find their way into his mind
and in effect begin to understand the mind of a young adult.
One
way which we have formed the ideas of how a young adult may turn to an adult is
to follow in the footsteps of the sire, however this path is something that the
young adult is less accepting of. During this time of self-discovery there is a
desire to forge one’s own path, which is essentially to not follow the path of
one’s parent. From this notion society has ascribed that the young adult will
inevitably rebel, giving rise to this looming fear in every parent with a child
reaching the teen years. This can be clearly seen in Hamlet’s evolution as his
indecisive meta nature begins with the charge from his father, in act one scene
five when King Hamlet’s ghost declares, “If thou didst ever thy dear father
love – / O God! / Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder”. From this point
on Hamlet is unable to act as he otherwise would in light of this call from his
father to leave the time of innocence and take of the adult responsibility and
avenge his father’s death. So here we find that this time of self-discovery in
young adulthood is essentially a transition from the innocence of childhood to
the responsibilities of being an adult.
We
are only vaguely informed about Hamlet’s past, which he was recently away at
school, but when he enters the play he is very obviously in the early stages of
young adult development. This is illustrated in his very first line in act one
scene two “A little more than kin, and less than kind.” In this we see already
his sarcastic and biting humor, which is something often attributed to the idea
of what a young adult is. However a change appears when Hamlet is called upon
to avenge his father, and is set upon a track to becoming an adult.
This path born of youth’s lack of
worldly experience creates the indecision seen in Hamlet, resulting in what
should be a life long struggle with ideas of good and evil. It is this that
Hamlet’s actions stem from, whether his father’s request to commit an evil act
is evil itself, or if it a request of justice and in turn is good. While trying to deal with the decision,
Hamlet uses a tourniquet common of people in similar situation, he externalizes
his decision-making. He, like our socially conceived youth, is so unsure of
whether his actions are right, that he allows the monumental verdict of
Claudius’s innocence to be based on the king’s reaction to the play. At the end
of act two Hamlet declares, “I’ll have the players/ Play something like the
murder of my father/ Before mine uncle. I’ll observe his looks;/ I’ll tent him
to the quick. If a do blench,/I know my course…/ The play’s the thing/ Wherein
I’ll catch the conscience of the King.” Thus making his decision not his own.
In this section he
also poses that the ghost he saw might have been a devil in disguise, tempting
him to evil, necessitating this elaborate ruse. However it seems unlikely that
Hamlet believes the vision of his father was evil, making his hesitation born
solely of his own forming conscience. This is displayed in his most famous
speech of “to be or not to be”; he poses the question asked of everyone at some
point of “whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer/ The slings and arrows of
outrageous fortune,/ or to take up arms agents a sea of troubles/ And by
opposing end them.” this suggests that he has already made up his mind of which
is better; as he is questing to do the right thing he obviously must choose
ending a sea of trouble.
It is this
indecision that scholars have agreed is the main contributor to the mass death
that is the culmination of this play. Had he not hesitated and followed his
father’s instructions at the first, he could have possibly avoided not only his
own death, but also everyone besides, of course, the king. It is in this that
we find purpose in what would seem a mistake of Shakespeare’s quill, the fact
that during the course of a four-month period, Hamlet ages from sixteen to
thirty. The reason being that Hamlet as a young adult is not capable of the act
committed by the adult Hamlet. By making one character riddled with the
indecision of youth, age from the necessity of needing to commit an adult act,
we see that Shakespeare is creating this idea we have about young adults. The
adult Hamlet arguably, even an over emphasized example of this discrepancy, is
sure of his decision by the end of this play. As he is certainly clever enough
to know of the king’s plot to kill him, he knowingly walks to his own death.
Just before the finale in act five scene two Hamlet drops a bible quote, “there
is a special providence/ In the fall of a sparrow” indicating that his
confidence in what he is doing is so sure, it is more akin to faith. Harold
Bloom in Hamlet: poem unread argues that
at this point Hamlet considers himself a Jesus like figure, walking to his own
death betrayed by a friend, but with head held high. This is such a stark
contrast with the completely inactive Hamlet that opens the play, no other
conclusion can be reached other than that these are not the same person. Thus
making Shakespeare’s unnatural ageing of the prince a device to illustrate this
point, that they are not the same person, one is a youth and the other is a
man.
This connection
between youth and death is a pivotal issue in another of Shakespeare’s
tragedies, Romeo and Juliet. This play
though embodies and creates several other concepts of youth as well, starting
in the opening scene of the play. The first the audience sees in this play is
the Montague boys acting as boys “often do,” and romping around town hurling
rude comments at passers by. In this Shakespeare is beginning to describe what
he views youth to be, undeterred and unabashed. Next the scene turns violent
with the entrance of the Capulets, and thus the first display of the feud
between the two families. In this altercation both sides begin to make this
connection between youth and death apparent in their senseless aggression
toward each other, but also add a new aspect to this analogy; love (or rather
sexuality at this point) enters the equation. This is don through the thinly
veiled symbolism of weapons being phallic instruments saying things like “My
naked weapon is out” and “Draw, if you be men”. This theme will run throughout
the play, but here it is seen as being pedestrian and average, young men
thinking only with their swords, wanting only to fight and have sex. The next
to enter this scene is the heads of both houses, whom seek to enter the fray,
and would do so if not for the cooler heads of their wives. This illustrates
that it is for only the younger generation to act in this passionate fashion,
the older generation is too held to responsibility. It is also important that
the men are restrained by their wives, implying that what could be called love
in the older generation acts as a deterrent to reenter the exercises of youth.
After this
standoff the play progresses to the Montague’s inquiring about their son,
Romeo. Benvolio goes to find him where they all know him to be, off lamenting
his one-sided love affair with Rosaline. It is this relationship that we must
contrast with Romeo’s later one with the fair Juliet, as they give definition
to our concept of what young love is. During this first portion of the play
before the star-crossed lovers meet, Romeo acts much more like we would expect
an adolescent to act when they are in self-proclaimed “love”. We see him as
Northrop Frye says “ with his cloths untidy, hardly heard what was said to him,
wrote poetry, talked endlessly about the cruelty of his mistress, wept and kept
‘adding to clouds more clouds with his deep sighs. (21)” this is the
characteristic melancholy moping we often think of when considering young love.
More to this idea is that Romeo is reluctant to ever even consider another
recipient for his affection. To him at this point his love for Rosaline is all
encompassing will never be surpassed, in essence the attitude of every person
the first time they fall in “love”.
We also see a
similar thing happening with Juliet in the beginning of this play in her
relationship with Paris; however in a different way. Juliet’s relationship with
Paris is arranged by her parents and thus is free of the complications that
riddle her relationship with Romeo, but rather has complications of a different
sort. In the first scene we meet Juliet, we hardly hear her speak, most of the
talking being done by lady Capulet and the nurse. Through her lack of speech
and enthusiasm, we find that Juliet is less consumed with this faux love as
Romeo. She seems to have resigned herself to the same path her mother took not
seeing another option. So really the similarity between her and Romeo at this
point is that they are both convinced that the love they have is the only one
they are going to get. This is typical of youth as described before, in that
youth blinds the young to what the future could hold through lack of life
experience.
The fateful
meeting of the lovers is set in motion is by Benvolio and Mercutio convincing
Romeo to attend the Capulet party. This is done in their convincing him to
forego his fruitless love for Rosaline and try to find a new girl. The argument
made be Benvolio is essentially for Romeo to act more like his peers and to
think less. Once in the party Romeo’s disguise is seen through almost at once
by Tybult, who calls for his sword to continue the feud. His hand his stayed
however by Old Capulet, who will not allow violence in his own house; however
by doing this Capulet is allowing the tragic love to commence.
With the scene
set, all that is left if for the lovers to meet, and it is love at first sight.
However this love is different then the examples we have seen thus far in the
play, and arguable different than any love before and any since. The audience
is convinced immediately that something has changed from the difference in the
lover’s speech. Before meeting Romeo Juliet rarely speaks and when she does
speak, the things she says are of little significance, but after, she speaks in
a fashion that would imply a much better education than that of a young adult
planning on being nothing more than a wife and a mother; and “it would have
never occurred to her to make use of her education in her speech in the way she
does here without the stimulus of her love. (Frye 25)” Romeo has a similar
transformation in his speech only to match Juliet’s, in that the true difference
in their speech before and after is found in their talking to each other. It is
not only that they individually have changed but rather their conversations
with others before and their conversations with each other. The famous balcony
scene is the best example of this in that individually their speech is better
but when heard together the two of them are elevated to something more.
This change is used to illustrate not
that two young adults have suddenly become eloquent, but instead that they
themselves have become something more. From the moment they set eyes on each
other Romeo and Juliet ascend from their status as adolescences and become something akin to adults. As
Frye states that after both Romeo and Juliet go to speak with the friar that
“he (the friar) realizes that the two young people he has previously thought of
as rather nice children have suddenly turned into adults, and are thinking with
adult authority. (25).” Here we find that the friar is the only character
outside the lovers themselves that recognizes that their love is something
more.
The rest of the
adults in the play are not the friar, they only see Romeo and Juliet to be
acting out what they see as “Puppy love”. As adults, they see the young adults
to be lesser and thus needing their guidance. This is exactly what we see in
our society today, in the common theory that parents know what’s best for their
kids. It is because of this that adolescences rebel, or at least the notions we
have of adolescence says they will rebel. This concept can be found in our
star-crossed loves when they choose to get married without their parent’s
consent or knowledge. This act, however, shows us that the friar was wrong in
assuming that Romeo and Juliet are beyond the adolescent stage and thus that he
was wrong to marry them; because if they were truly mature enough to make the
decision to get hitched, they would have found a way to do it with their
parents consent. This is not to say that their love does not transcend that of
typical young love, only that they themselves are not yet adults.
So we find that
Romeo and Juliet have created a new space for themselves, as they are not yet
subject to the responsibility of adulthood, but are in possession of a love
that cannot be classified as immature. Much like Hamlet’s age change, this
liminal space the loves occupy could be considered a mistake by Shakespeare, it
is not; and rather is a device he used that furthers our understanding of
adolescence.
The metaphor that
runs through this play concerning night and day , and dreams and reality, is
proof of this place Romeo and Juliet find themselves. Through out the play the
lovers find that for the most part they only find themselves together at night,
the party, balcony scene, and their sex scene all come during the night. These
are the times when they can be together without the interference of other
characters, the times when their love can be their own. One speech that gives
light to this idea is Mercutio’s Queen Mab speech in which he details that it
is Mab who comes at night to give lovers dreams of love, thus making night and
dreams connected with love. But there is a sense of these things being
connected with youth, in that when young the world seems a place of infinite
possibility and innocence free of the duties the daylight brings; where two
young lovers may find they can exist together.
However as stated
above Romeo and Juliet cannot exist only at night, they must too attempt to
live in the day. So while the night represents dreams and childhood, the day
then must represent reality and adulthood, which as we see in the play, it
does. It is during the day that Romeo and Juliet’s actions attempt to be
responsible, the main one being their marriage. This shows that despite the
fact that is a misguided attempt, the act of getting married is the lovers
attempt to take responsibility for their love. However, this seems to operate
less as a desire for responsibility and more out of a desire for carnal acts,
as they feel they need to be married before they can have sex. After their sex
scene however we see that day reenters the picture in as mush as the day must
always follow the night. Here we see that the lovers curse the day, and wish
for that night to continue forever. Juliet implores Romeo to stay after the harbinger
of day, the lark, makes it known, but they both know he cannot. For with the
day come consequences, the natural companion of responsibility, in this case
meaning that if Romeo were to stay he would be discovered by the Capulets and
killed. To this Romeo states “Let me be put to death./ I am content” which
shows both his devotion to Juliet but also that he is prepared for the
inevitable consequence of their love. For as the audience we know that the
lovers will die for their love, we recognize that it is something they
themselves are prepared for.
Romeo’s readiness
for death illustrates that which we all are aware of, that Romeo and Juliet’s
love is not something that can exist in our world, for it is something too
great. There is a sense here that in the night of youth we can have something
that cannot be found light of day’s reality: that love on this scale is a
dream. This sense creates the notion that as we grow up, something is lost;
that there is a beauty to youth that simply will not fit into the
responsibilities of adulthood. While we are young we are more able to love more
purely than we ever can as adults, because as adults we have seen too much of
the world to not know better. It is from this that Shakespeare is making full
use of what a tragedy is capable of.
The tragedy of
this play is found in the loss of two things; the first is the loss of youth in
the sense that it is the loss of our future, these two smart and beautiful
people can no longer make the world a better place. The second is the loss of a
love of this caliber, that the world is a worse place having lost something so
pure. And through these two losses Shakespeare is making a comment that through
our deciding who adolescents should be and trying to make them such, even if they
are more than we could ever imagine, we create a world where youth must either
conform or die out.
Youth is a violent
time; full of self-discovery and passion. It is a time when we attempt to
realize our potential while discovering what the world really is. This is made
more difficult by societies notions of what an adolescent should be, shaping
how adults see adolescents and how adolescents see themselves. These views are
done with the best intentions, to help the young enter the ranks of the adults
with as little harm as possible. These ideas and notions of young adults seem
as though they are inherent, but as we have discovered they are constructs that
don’t always fit, and are all things found in Shakespeare. This means that
while adolescents may inherently have some of these characteristics,
Shakespeare drastically influenced our concept of modern youth.
